Modular Plant Layout Modeling for Faster Chemical Reconfiguration

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The existing methods for producing chemical products are time-consuming and expensive due to the need for frequent dismantling and reconfiguration of production plants with individually designed structures, which hampers efficient production of various chemical products.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method for creating a two-dimensional plant model of a modular production plant with interconnected process modules and containers, allowing for flexible arrangement and reuse of process containers with standardized connections for easy transport and setup, optimizing space and material usage.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If production plants are designed with customized layouts for each chemical product, then the production process can be optimized for specific products, but the assembly and dismantling time and cost increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproduction efficiencyVSAvoidassembly and dismantling time
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The production plant is divided into modular process sections that can be independently assembled and disassembled. Each process section contains specific functional units that can be reconfigured for different chemical products, eliminating the need to dismantle entire customized layouts while maintaining product-specific optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The plant layout transitions from static customized designs to dynamic reconfigurable modules. The modular sections can be dynamically assembled and disassembled according to production requirements, allowing rapid adaptation to different chemical products without significant time loss.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Productivity

If production plants are customized for each chemical product, then production optimization is achieved, but the cost of assembly and dismantling increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproduction efficiencyVSAvoidmanufacturing cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The modular process sections are designed with universal interfaces and standardized components that can serve multiple chemical production processes. This multi-functionality reduces the need for specialized custom-built sections, thereby lowering assembly and dismantling costs while maintaining product-specific production optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of discarding entire customized plant layouts after each product run, the modular design allows recovery and reuse of process sections. Valuable process modules can be retained and reconfigured for different products, reducing material and labor costs associated with repeated assembly and dismantling.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #34Discarding and recovering

3Adaptability or versatility

If process modules are arranged flexibly within process containers, then adaptability to different production needs is improved, but the complexity of arrangement and configuration increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocess variabilityVSAvoidarrangement complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The process containers are segmented into standardized grid positions, and process modules are designed to fit these predefined slots. This segmentation provides flexibility for different arrangements while constraining the complexity within a standardized framework, making configuration manageable through modular assembly rules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses parameter-based configuration where module properties and grid cell properties are defined through standardized parameters. This allows flexible arrangement through parameter assignment rather than complex structural design, simplifying the configuration process while maintaining high adaptability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP2936261B1Computerized method for producing a production plant model
Publication Date: 2021.01.20 BAYER AG
  • EP2936261B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2936261B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2936261B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The invention concerns a computerized method for producing a two-dimensional plant model of a modular production plant for producing a chemical product, the production plant comprising at least two processing modules, which can be connected to one another for production purposes, and at least one processing container in which the processing modules can be accommodated at least partially, as required, wherein, for each processing container, a common two-dimensional container model (2) of its base area (3) and of the base area (3) of a container environment at least partially surrounding the processing container and of predefinable size being generated, wherein, for each processing module, a two-dimensional module model (5) of its base area is generated, wherein the container model (2) and the module model (5) are divided into fields (1, 4) which are of equal size and preferably square, there being assigned to each field (4) of a module model (5) a module property concerning the occupancy of the particular field (4) by a functional device, of the particular processing module, disposed above the base area portion, of the particular processing module, corresponding to this field (4), by an operations room which is disposed above the base area portion, of the particular processing module, corresponding to this field (4) and assigned to the processing module, or by a material outlet of the processing module which is disposed above the base area portion, of the particular processing module, corresponding to this field (4), there being assigned to each field (1) of the container model (2) an occupancy property concerning the (im)possibility of the particular field (1) being occupied by a module property, the module model (5) being disposed in the container model (2) taking account of the module properties and occupancy properties.